Turkish Courts-Martial of 1919-20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Armenian Genocide
Background
Armenians in the Ottoman Empire · Armenian Question · Hamidian Massacres · Zeitun Resistance (1895) · 1896 Ottoman Bank Takeover · Yıldız Attempt · Adana Massacre · Young Turk Revolution
The Genocide

Armenian notables deported from the Ottoman capital · Tehcir Law · Armenian casualties of deportations · Ottoman Armenian casualties  · Labour battalion

Major extermination centers:
Bitlis · Deir ez-Zor · Diyarbakır · Erzurum · Kharput · Muş · Sivas · Trabzon

Resistance:
Zeitun  · Van · Musa Dagh · Urfa · Shabin-Karahisar · Armenian militia

Foreign aid and relief:
Reactions · American Committee for Relief in the Near East
Responsible parties

Young Turks:
Talat · Enver · Djemal · Committee of Union and Progress · Teskilati Mahsusa · The Special Organization · Ottoman Army · Kurdish Irregulars · Topal Osman
Aftermath
Courts-Martial · Operation Nemesis · Partitioning of the Ottoman Empire · Denial of the Genocide
This box: view • talk • edit

Turkish Courts-Martial of 1919-1920 were courts-martial of the Ottoman Empire after the armistice of Mudros during the aftermath the World War One, which the leadership of the Committee of Union and Progress and selected former officials were court-martialled with/including the charges of subversion of the constitution, wartime profiteering, and the massacres of both Greeks and Armenians[1]. Most of the Turkish courts-martial were dismissed and the serious ones were relocated to the "International Court-Martial in Malta" rather than being held in a Turkish court whose "findings cannot be held of any account at all." (John de Robeck, [2])

The courts-martial were labelled "Turkish" because of their selective accusation of only the Turkish subjects of the Ottoman Empire. These courts-martial became a stage for political battles. The trials helped the Liberal Union (Ottoman Empire) root out the Committee of Union and Progress from the political arena[3]. During the second stage of the international trials, Ottoman politicians, generals, and intellectuals were relocated from Istanbul jails to "International trials in Malta" (cf. Malta exiles), where they were held for some three years while searches were made in the archives of Istanbul, London, Paris and Washington to find proof of their guilt[4]. The trials formed a key argument in the Treaty of Sèvres, which resulted in the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire.

Contents

[edit] Background

[edit] Hostilities, 1914- October 1918

Beginning of the World War One, regarding the news coming from Anatolia and Van Resistance on 24 May 1915 the Triple Entente warned the Ottoman Empire that "In the view of these...crimes of Turkey against humanity and civilization ... the Allied governments announce publicly.. that they will hold personally responsible... all members of the Ottoman government and those of their agents who are implicated in such massacres.[5]"

[edit] Military administration, November 1918

Further information: Armistice of Mudros, Occupation of Istanbul, and Malta exiles

The Allies did not wait for a peace treaty after the Armistice of Mudros for claiming the Ottoman territory. Just 13 days after the Armistice of Mudros, a French brigade entered İstanbul on November 12, 1918. The first British Troops entered the city on November 13, 1918. Early in December 1918, Allied troops occupied sections of Istanbul and set up an Allied military administration. High Commissioner Admiral Somerset Arthur Gough-Calthorpe was assigned as the military adviser to Istanbul. His first task was to arrest between 160 and 200 persons from the Government of Tevfik Pasha on January 1919 [6] Among this group, he send thirty to Malta (Malta exiles). Calthorpe included only Turkish members of the Government of Tevfik Pasha and the military/political personalities. He wanted to send a message that a military occupation was in effect and failure to comply would end with harsh punishment. His position was not shared with other partners. French Government's response on these presumed guilty people was "distinction to disadvantage of Muslim-Turks while Bulgarian, Austrian and German offenders were as yet neither arrested nor molested"[7]. However, government and Sultan got the message. On February 1919, allies was informed that Ottoman Empire was in compliance with its full apparatus to the occupation forces. Any source of conflict (including Armenian questions) would be investigated by a commission which neutral Governments can attach two legal superintendents[8]. Calthorpe's correspondence to the British Foreign Office was "The action undertaken for the arrests was very satisfactory, and has, I think, intimidated the Committee of Union and Progress of Constantinople"[9].

[edit] The trials

See also: Court martial

[edit] Establishment, April 28, 1919

The message of Calthorpe on Military administration fully noted by the Sultan. There was an eastern tradition of presenting gifts to the authority during the serious conflicts; sometimes "falling of heads". There was no higher goal than preserving the integrity of the Ottoman Institution. If the anger of Calthorpe could be calmed down by the foisting the blame on a few members of the Committee of Union and Progress, which Ottoman Empire could thereby receive more lenient treatment at the Paris peace conference[10]; that could be achieved. The local court-martial were establishing while the Paris Peace Conference, 1919 with "The Commission on Responsibilities and Sanctions", were adding several articles to the treaty demanding the acting government of the Ottoman Empire, Sultan Mehmed VI and Damat Ferid Pasha, should be summoned to trial.

[edit] Structure

[edit] Legal Issues

The tribunals were held under occupation, thus the judges were under the scrutiny of the occupying forces. Due process did not exist, and there were gross absences of legal rights; defenders and lawyers feared for their life. The Ottoman penal code did not acknowledge the right of cross-examination. Some Western authors claimed that these were matters of local jurisprudence and the verdicts had to be trusted. However, the validity of the evidence presented in these testimonials has been questioned owing to a lack of defendant rights. Historians familiar with Ottoman jurisprudence do not hold the process of these trials in a positive light[11]. The decision was taken by evidence submitted during the preparatory phase, the trial, and how the defender present his defense. During the trials, none of the presented evidence was verified. The validity of the evidences presented, such as letters and orders have been in study. Some of them had proven to be forgeries. In some cases hearsay was an issue as direct evidence has never been presented (one direct evidence regarding Talat Pasha was claimed to be a forgery (the signature, the code/number of the document, and the missing stamp). During the trials, testimonies were not subjected to cross-examination, or some of the materials were presented as "anonymous court material" (i.e., not sponsored by a witness, who has sworn or solemnly affirmed to tell the truth) [12].

When the international trials were staged, the High Commissioner at Constantinople, Calthorpe, was replaced by John de Robeck, the Commander-in-Chief, Mediterranean, who said "that its findings cannot be held of any account at all."[13]

[edit] Aftermath

[edit] Outcomes

The article which were proposed to be added at the Paris Peace Conference, 1919 under "The Commission on Responsibilities and Sanctions" demanding the acting government of the Ottoman Empire, Sultan Mehmed VI and Damat Ferid Pasha, should be summoned to trial, was not included in the Treaty of Sèvres. Interestingly, Damat Ferid Pasha was one of the four signatories.

[edit] The International Trials

Further information: Malta exiles

There exists the notion that "international" trials - in essence, trials organized by the Allies - either took place in Malta or were otherwise planned but not executed. Historian Peter Balakian, however, points out that in reality Malta was never more than a British prison where various CUP officials were held in the hopes that such an "international" trial would be held at a future date. It is held by some Armenian Genocide denialists that trials actually took place here and the "fact" that no evidence from the Turkish Military Tribunals was used by the court is proof of the said evidence's inadequacy and/or illegitimacy. In reality, however, no trial was ever held and the prisoners were soon released in return for British POWs.

[edit] Operation Nemesis

Further information: Operation Nemesis

The Ottoman military tribunal and subsequent international trials, which the British dismissed, exonerated those the Armenian Revolutionary Federation perceived as the masterminds behind the Great Calamity. At the Armenian Revolutionary Federation's 9th General Congress, which convened in Yerevan from September 27 to the end of October 1919, the issue of retribution against those responsible was on the agenda. A task force, led by Shahan Natalie, working with Grigor Merjanov, was established to assassinate Talaat Pasha, Pipit Jivanshir Khan, Said Halim Pasha, Behaeddin Shakir Bey, Jemal Azmi, Cemal Pasha, Enver Pasha, as well as several Armenian traitors.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ Taner Akçam, Armenien und der Völkermord: Die Istanbuler Prozesse und die Türkische Nationalbewegung (Hamburg: Hamburger Edition, 1996), p. 185.
  2. ^ Public Record Office, Foreign Office, 371/4174/136069
  3. ^ Klaus-Detlev. Grothusen, "Türkei" page 35
  4. ^ Türkei By Klaus-Detlev. Grothusen
  5. ^ William S. Allen, The Nazi Seizure of Power: The Experience of a Single German Town 1922-1945, Franklin Watts; Revised edition (1984). Also see: William A. Schabas, Genocide in International Law: The Crimes of Crimes, Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp. 16-17
  6. ^ Public Record Office, Foreign Office 371/4172/13694
  7. ^ Public Record Office, Foreign Office, 371/4172/28138
  8. ^ Public Record Office, Foreign Office, 371/4172/28138
  9. ^ Public Record Office, Foreign Office, 371/4172/23004
  10. ^ Vahakn N. Dadrian, "The Documentation of the World War I Armenian Massacres in the Proceedings of the Turkish Military Tribunal," International Journal of Middle East Studies 23(1991): 554; idem, "The Turkish Military Tribunal's Prosecution of the Authors of the Armenian Genocide: Four Major Court-Martial Series," Holocaust and Genocide Studies, 11(1997): 31.
  11. ^ Yılmaz Altug, trans., The Turkish Code of Criminal Procedure (London: Sweet and Maxwell, 1962), art. 232.
  12. ^ Heck to State Department, Feb. 7, 1919, U.S. National Archives, RG 59, 867.00/81 (M 820, roll 536, fr. 440)
  13. ^ Public Record Office, Foreign Office, 371/4174/136069
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/u/r/Turkish_Courts-Martial_of_1919-20_2244.html"